Batman vs Superman looks like a stinker

[GHook93]

500 million on opening weekend a stinker?

Movie plot and like-ability is more important to me than box office since I don't get a piece of the pie!

Also box office doesn't always mean good movie. Every transformers after the 1st one. Spider-Man 3 etc.

 

[Wyatt earp]

500 million on opening weekend a stinker?

Movie plot and like-ability is more important to me than box office since I don't get a piece of the pie!

Also box office doesn't always mean good movie. Every transformers after the 1st one. Spider-Man 3 etc.

I agree, I was just saying it made a lot of money, I absolutely hate superhero movies.

Just watched the final girls, that was a good thought out original movie.

 

[GHook93]

500 million on opening weekend a stinker?

Movie plot and like-ability is more important to me than box office since I don't get a piece of the pie!

Also box office doesn't always mean good movie. Every transformers after the 1st one. Spider-Man 3 etc.

I agree, I was just saying it made a lot of money, I absolutely hate superhero movies.

Just watched the final girls, that was a good thought out original movie.

It made $425 mil worldwide. I read that they went well over budget and spend $400 mil production and then spent a ton on marketing. It was reported they have to make north of billion for it to be a success.

I see a huge drop off week 2. I think there were people like me that said OK the plot will probably suck, but the end fight scenes will be worth it, then I think word of mouth will destroy the buzz for everyone who didn't rush out opening weekend.

 

[GHook93]

Either way this let down is going to hurt the upcoming not so popular DCEU movies:
(1) Suicide Squad: It better get good reviews or the movie is toast. Batman vs Superman had the 2 most icon heros going at it. A PG13 movie about a band of super-villains that no one really knows yet is risky. The Joker looks like a carnival clown on heroin. The timing of this movie makes zero sense. I could see this one coming out after a few more of the super-heros get introduced, but this seems way too early.

I predict a flop.

(2) Wonder Woman: Not as popular as Batman or Superman. It better get good ratings or it is toast.

(3) Justice League: If BvS fails to make the billion mark and SS and WW flop I can't see WB continuing with this movie!

 

[GHook93]

Worst Actor in the movie: Jesse Eisenberg. Who in their right mind thought Eisenberg should be Lex Luther?

LL is not a wirey psycho. He is a cold calculating, brilliant, evil planner. His goal is always world domination not world destruction. None of his motives made sense. He created a monster in which he had zero ability to control? The more think about this movie the more I hate it.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Yep, it blew. It was boring and dumb. The only good thing about the movie was Wonder Woman's theme music.

Batman goes from trying to kill Superman, to allying with him in seconds - just because their moms have the same name?

 

[Sgt_Gath]

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

The critics seem to be destroying this movie! I am wary of critics, because I have seen times were they destroyed a movie that I enjoyed - Funny People comes to mind.

However for the most part when all the critics are against something the movie is mediocre at best.

The critics seem to not like this movie. For a movie that was so expensive it was reported that it needs to crack a billion worldwide to make a profit, thinks aren't looking good.

While I loved Man of Steel, it seems very few other people liked it.

2 stinkers in a row and a foresure to under-perform suicide squad DCEU isn't off to a great start.

I just got back from seeing it.

My opinion? It was "okay" with some "eh" features here and there.

I don't think it was as good as the first Avengers film, or Deadpool, but it's hardly the "disaster" people are making it out to be either. It just has some pacing issues, takes itself a tad too seriously, suffers from a few mildly annoying "Snyderisms," and has some clunky plot elements. It more than redeems itself by the end, however.


Pros

- Cavil is fine as Superman, as usual.

- Affleck as Batman (or - rather - Bruce Wayne) is actually one of the highlights of the film. He has a certain weary, low-key, cynical and unhappy intensity about him which serves the character well.

He's a bit more kill-happy (or, at the very least, more blasé with regard to the consequences of extreme violence) than usually depicted, and some people have been complaining that he seems to come off as being a "psychotic thug" as such. To that, I say - where the former is concerned - it's a little jarring at first, but you ultimately get over it, and - to the later - yea, that's kind of the whole point. He's Batman, he's supposed to have "issues," and that is clearly what Affleck was going for in his performance.

Hell! They even bring up Bruce Wane's (so far ignored in cinema) promiscuity... Albeit in a subtle way. He casually mentions at least one tryst, and more than once, we see an anonymous, faceless, and basically irrelevant female body sharing his bed in the morning scenes. The implication being that these women ultimately mean as little to the film as they do to Bruce himself. It's clever, and I appreciate that; basically James Bond without the romanticization of such behavior that usually entails.

It's also interesting to note that this version of Bruce's parents (played, amusingly enough, by Maggie and Negan from 'The Walking Dead') are actually shot because they try to fight back. I wonder what we're meant to take from that.

- Wonder Woman was pretty good, I thought. Her "formal" introduction was actually one of the best scenes in the movie.

First off, Gal Gadot is freaking gorgeous (just throwing that out there lol).

Secondly, she fit the right balance with regard to personality and performance. She didn't come off as being "over the top"/"in your face" in her abilities, or overly butch. She was simply serious, and competent, while remaining distinctly feminine. They left it at - as "matter of factly" as they could - which worked surprisingly well. Her abilities, when she finally appeared in costume, didn't strain suspension of disbelief at all for that reason (IMO, anyway).

- The actual fight between Batman and Superman is decent enough (the best they could do without making it seem ridiculous, I suppose).

- The final battle with Doomsday is cool, and pretty well done. They even corrected one of Man of Steel's more glaring flaws by accounting for civilian, collateral, damage, and moving the fight out of the city's populated areas. They also set it at night, so the effects are less obvious.​

Cons

- The dream sequences. Ugh. They're hokey, add very little, and tack an extra thirty minutes on to the film's running time. All I can figure is that they're meant to set something up in a sequel (given the appearance of a 'time traveler' in the final one).

- Lex Luthor. His plan ultimately turns out to be interesting, but I really didn't like Jessie Eisenberg's performance nevertheless.

Put bluntly, Loki, he is not. He comes off as being an annoying little twerp more than anything else. They should have stuck with Kevin Spacey. Lol

- Some of Batman's more heavily choreographed fight scenes really stretched suspension of disbelief (see 'annoying Snyderisms' above). Why is Batman able to skitter along ceilings like freaking Spiderman? Is it one of his "wonderful toys?" Establish it then. For that matter, it looks like a lot of the goons he fights deliberately hesitate before pulling the trigger for no reason other than plot convenience. This whole aspect of the film could have been handled better.

- Lois Lane still feels like a bit of a "third wheel." There are also waaaay too many convenient plot elements revolving around her.

How does she always know precisely where Superman is? How does he always know precisely where she is? That could have probably used an establishing scene of some sort (no, Africa really wasn't good enough).

- Some of the lines meant to feel "deep" and "thought provoking" fall short of the intended mark.

- The ending third of the film feels a bit rushed in comparison to what came before.

- I think introducing Doomsday and Darkseid this early in the game is a bit pre-mature.​

....

In any eventuality, it's leaps and bounds better than any of the "Fantastic 4" movies, or cinematic train wrecks like "Daredevil," and the "Amazing Spiderman 2." I'm okay with that.

Overall: 6.8 out of 10

 

[GHook93]

Yep, it blew. It was boring and dumb. The only good thing about the movie was Wonder Woman's theme music.

Batman goes from trying to kill Superman, to allying with him in seconds - just because their moms have the same name?

They picked a hot Wonder Woman that is foresure.

Yea I was like come on. Who cares if they have the same name. I remember an asshole I used to work with mother was the same as my mother that didn't change the fact he is an asshole.

The set up in the desert man no sense! First the guys were terrorists. Second they were all shot! Lois Lane, who works for a national newspaper, was there and could have easily gotten the word out.

It still made no sense why Batman wanted to kill Superman. Batman feared the Krytonians, yet Superman risked his life to defeat the Krytonians!

 

[GHook93]

Here is how the movie should have gone:
(1) Show the view from the ground by Wayne during the Zod and Superman fight. That was actually cool.
(2) Show Batman busting up Lex Corp illegal operations. Luther's plan is to manipulate Superman to get Batman
(3) Superman view Batman as an out of control vigilante. With this view manipulated by Superman.
(4) Superman confronts Batman when Batman is on patrol. Batman finds a way to escape by using a piece of krytonite.
(5) Batman creates a mechanic suit that increases his strength speed and allows him to leap enormous distances and is made out of Krytonite.
(6) Batman confronts Superman with the intentions of showing Batman is one of the good guys and not the intention of killing him.
(7) The suit weakens Superman, but Superman still has his powers, but the field is even.
(8) Have an enormous battle ending in a tie with the heros finding respect for one another!

 

[ChrisL]

I'm sure the special effects are really cool, but the whole idea sounds really, really stupid, IMO. I would not spend money to see this movie, that is for sure.

 

[ChrisL]

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

The critics seem to be destroying this movie! I am wary of critics, because I have seen times were they destroyed a movie that I enjoyed - Funny People comes to mind.

However for the most part when all the critics are against something the movie is mediocre at best.

The critics seem to not like this movie. For a movie that was so expensive it was reported that it needs to crack a billion worldwide to make a profit, thinks aren't looking good.

While I loved Man of Steel, it seems very few other people liked it.

2 stinkers in a row and a foresure to under-perform suicide squad DCEU isn't off to a great start.

I just got back from seeing it.

My opinion? It was "okay" with some "eh" features here and there.

I don't think it was as good as the first Avengers film, or Deadpool, but it's hardly the "disaster" people are making it out to be either. It just has some pacing issues, takes itself a tad too seriously, suffers from a few mildly annoying "Snyderisms," and has some clunky plot elements. It more than redeems itself by the end, however.


Pros

- Cavil is fine as Superman, as usual.

- Affleck as Batman (or - rather - Bruce Wayne) is actually one of the highlights of the film. He has a certain weary, low-key, cynical and unhappy intensity about him which serves the character well.

He's a bit more kill-happy (or, at the very least, more blasé with regard to the consequences of extreme violence) than usually depicted, and some people have been complaining that he seems to come off as being a "psychotic thug" as such. To that, I say - where the former is concerned - it's a little jarring at first, but you ultimately get over it, and - to the later - yea, that's kind of the whole point. He's Batman, he's supposed to have "issues," and that is clearly what Affleck was going for in his performance.

Hell! They even bring up Bruce Wane's (so far ignored in cinema) promiscuity... Albeit in a subtle way. He casually mentions at least one tryst, and more than once, we see an anonymous, faceless, and basically irrelevant female body sharing his bed in the morning scenes. The implication being that these women ultimately mean as little to the film as they do to Bruce himself. It's clever, and I appreciate that; basically James Bond without the romanticization of such behavior that usually entails.

It's also interesting to note that this version of Bruce's parents (played, amusingly enough, by Maggie and Negan from 'The Walking Dead') are actually shot because they try to fight back. I wonder what we're meant to take from that.

- Wonder Woman was pretty good, I thought. Her "formal" introduction was actually one of the best scenes in the movie.

First off, Gal Gadot is freaking gorgeous (just throwing that out there lol).

Secondly, she fit the right balance with regard to personality and performance. She didn't come off as being "over the top"/"in your face" in her abilities, or overly butch. She was simply serious, and competent, while remaining distinctly feminine. They left it at - as "matter of factly" as they could - which worked surprisingly well. Her abilities, when she finally appeared in costume, didn't strain suspension of disbelief at all for that reason (IMO, anyway).

- The actual fight between Batman and Superman is decent enough (the best they could do without making it seem ridiculous, I suppose).

- The final battle with Doomsday is cool, and pretty well done. They even corrected one of Man of Steel's more glaring flaws by accounting for civilian, collateral, damage, and moving the fight out of the city's populated areas. They also set it at night, so the effects are less obvious.​

Cons

- The dream sequences. Ugh. They're hokey, add very little, and tack an extra thirty minutes on to the film's running time. All I can figure is that they're meant to set something up in a sequel (given the appearance of a 'time traveler' in the final one).

- Lex Luthor. His plan ultimately turns out to be interesting, but I really didn't like Jessie Eisenberg's performance nevertheless.

Put bluntly, Loki, he is not. He comes off as being an annoying little twerp more than anything else. They should have stuck with Kevin Spacey. Lol

- Some of Batman's more heavily choreographed fight scenes really stretched suspension of disbelief (see 'annoying Snyderisms' above). Why is Batman able to skitter along ceilings like freaking Spiderman? Is it one of his "wonderful toys?" Establish it then. For that matter, it looks like a lot of the goons he fights deliberately hesitate before pulling the trigger for no reason other than plot convenience. This whole aspect of the film could have been handled better.

- Lois Lane still feels like a bit of a "third wheel." There are also waaaay too many convenient plot elements revolving around her.

How does she always know precisely where Superman is? How does he always know precisely where she is? That could have probably used an establishing scene of some sort (no, Africa really wasn't good enough).

- Some of the lines meant to feel "deep" and "thought provoking" fall short of the intended mark.

- The ending third of the film feels a bit rushed in comparison to what came before.

- I think introducing Doomsday and Darkseid this early in the game is a bit pre-mature.​

....

In any eventuality, it's leaps and bounds better than any of the "Fantastic 4" movies, or cinematic train wrecks like "Daredevil," and the "Amazing Spiderman 2." I'm okay with that.

Overall: 6.8 out of 10

A 6.8???!!!! Wow! I wasn't expecting you to give it such a good rating. It looks so stupid in the trailers.

 

[ChrisL]

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

The critics seem to be destroying this movie! I am wary of critics, because I have seen times were they destroyed a movie that I enjoyed - Funny People comes to mind.

However for the most part when all the critics are against something the movie is mediocre at best.

The critics seem to not like this movie. For a movie that was so expensive it was reported that it needs to crack a billion worldwide to make a profit, thinks aren't looking good.

While I loved Man of Steel, it seems very few other people liked it.

2 stinkers in a row and a foresure to under-perform suicide squad DCEU isn't off to a great start.

I just got back from seeing it.

My opinion? It was "okay" with some "eh" features here and there.

I don't think it was as good as the first Avengers film, or Deadpool, but it's hardly the "disaster" people are making it out to be either. It just has some pacing issues, takes itself a tad too seriously, suffers from a few mildly annoying "Snyderisms," and has some clunky plot elements. It more than redeems itself by the end, however.


Pros

- Cavil is fine as Superman, as usual.

- Affleck as Batman (or - rather - Bruce Wayne) is actually one of the highlights of the film. He has a certain weary, low-key, cynical and unhappy intensity about him which serves the character well.

He's a bit more kill-happy (or, at the very least, more blasé with regard to the consequences of extreme violence) than usually depicted, and some people have been complaining that he seems to come off as being a "psychotic thug" as such. To that, I say - where the former is concerned - it's a little jarring at first, but you ultimately get over it, and - to the later - yea, that's kind of the whole point. He's Batman, he's supposed to have "issues," and that is clearly what Affleck was going for in his performance.

Hell! They even bring up Bruce Wane's (so far ignored in cinema) promiscuity... Albeit in a subtle way. He casually mentions at least one tryst, and more than once, we see an anonymous, faceless, and basically irrelevant female body sharing his bed in the morning scenes. The implication being that these women ultimately mean as little to the film as they do to Bruce himself. It's clever, and I appreciate that; basically James Bond without the romanticization of such behavior that usually entails.

It's also interesting to note that this version of Bruce's parents (played, amusingly enough, by Maggie and Negan from 'The Walking Dead') are actually shot because they try to fight back. I wonder what we're meant to take from that.

- Wonder Woman was pretty good, I thought. Her "formal" introduction was actually one of the best scenes in the movie.

First off, Gal Gadot is freaking gorgeous (just throwing that out there lol).

Secondly, she fit the right balance with regard to personality and performance. She didn't come off as being "over the top"/"in your face" in her abilities, or overly butch. She was simply serious, and competent, while remaining distinctly feminine. They left it at - as "matter of factly" as they could - which worked surprisingly well. Her abilities, when she finally appeared in costume, didn't strain suspension of disbelief at all for that reason (IMO, anyway).

- The actual fight between Batman and Superman is decent enough (the best they could do without making it seem ridiculous, I suppose).

- The final battle with Doomsday is cool, and pretty well done. They even corrected one of Man of Steel's more glaring flaws by accounting for civilian, collateral, damage, and moving the fight out of the city's populated areas. They also set it at night, so the effects are less obvious.​

Cons

- The dream sequences. Ugh. They're hokey, add very little, and tack an extra thirty minutes on to the film's running time. All I can figure is that they're meant to set something up in a sequel (given the appearance of a 'time traveler' in the final one).

- Lex Luthor. His plan ultimately turns out to be interesting, but I really didn't like Jessie Eisenberg's performance nevertheless.

Put bluntly, Loki, he is not. He comes off as being an annoying little twerp more than anything else. They should have stuck with Kevin Spacey. Lol

- Some of Batman's more heavily choreographed fight scenes really stretched suspension of disbelief (see 'annoying Snyderisms' above). Why is Batman able to skitter along ceilings like freaking Spiderman? Is it one of his "wonderful toys?" Establish it then. For that matter, it looks like a lot of the goons he fights deliberately hesitate before pulling the trigger for no reason other than plot convenience. This whole aspect of the film could have been handled better.

- Lois Lane still feels like a bit of a "third wheel." There are also waaaay too many convenient plot elements revolving around her.

How does she always know precisely where Superman is? How does he always know precisely where she is? That could have probably used an establishing scene of some sort (no, Africa really wasn't good enough).

- Some of the lines meant to feel "deep" and "thought provoking" fall short of the intended mark.

- The ending third of the film feels a bit rushed in comparison to what came before.

- I think introducing Doomsday and Darkseid this early in the game is a bit pre-mature.​

....

In any eventuality, it's leaps and bounds better than any of the "Fantastic 4" movies, or cinematic train wrecks like "Daredevil," and the "Amazing Spiderman 2." I'm okay with that.

Overall: 6.8 out of 10

Which one was the "bad guy?" Superman or Batman? You weren't very clear on that. And also, why are they fighting with each other?

 

[Sgt_Gath]

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

The critics seem to be destroying this movie! I am wary of critics, because I have seen times were they destroyed a movie that I enjoyed - Funny People comes to mind.

However for the most part when all the critics are against something the movie is mediocre at best.

The critics seem to not like this movie. For a movie that was so expensive it was reported that it needs to crack a billion worldwide to make a profit, thinks aren't looking good.

While I loved Man of Steel, it seems very few other people liked it.

2 stinkers in a row and a foresure to under-perform suicide squad DCEU isn't off to a great start.

I just got back from seeing it.

My opinion? It was "okay" with some "eh" features here and there.

I don't think it was as good as the first Avengers film, or Deadpool, but it's hardly the "disaster" people are making it out to be either. It just has some pacing issues, takes itself a tad too seriously, suffers from a few mildly annoying "Snyderisms," and has some clunky plot elements. It more than redeems itself by the end, however.


Pros

- Cavil is fine as Superman, as usual.

- Affleck as Batman (or - rather - Bruce Wayne) is actually one of the highlights of the film. He has a certain weary, low-key, cynical and unhappy intensity about him which serves the character well.

He's a bit more kill-happy (or, at the very least, more blasé with regard to the consequences of extreme violence) than usually depicted, and some people have been complaining that he seems to come off as being a "psychotic thug" as such. To that, I say - where the former is concerned - it's a little jarring at first, but you ultimately get over it, and - to the later - yea, that's kind of the whole point. He's Batman, he's supposed to have "issues," and that is clearly what Affleck was going for in his performance.

Hell! They even bring up Bruce Wane's (so far ignored in cinema) promiscuity... Albeit in a subtle way. He casually mentions at least one tryst, and more than once, we see an anonymous, faceless, and basically irrelevant female body sharing his bed in the morning scenes. The implication being that these women ultimately mean as little to the film as they do to Bruce himself. It's clever, and I appreciate that; basically James Bond without the romanticization of such behavior that usually entails.

It's also interesting to note that this version of Bruce's parents (played, amusingly enough, by Maggie and Negan from 'The Walking Dead') are actually shot because they try to fight back. I wonder what we're meant to take from that.

- Wonder Woman was pretty good, I thought. Her "formal" introduction was actually one of the best scenes in the movie.

First off, Gal Gadot is freaking gorgeous (just throwing that out there lol).

Secondly, she fit the right balance with regard to personality and performance. She didn't come off as being "over the top"/"in your face" in her abilities, or overly butch. She was simply serious, and competent, while remaining distinctly feminine. They left it at - as "matter of factly" as they could - which worked surprisingly well. Her abilities, when she finally appeared in costume, didn't strain suspension of disbelief at all for that reason (IMO, anyway).

- The actual fight between Batman and Superman is decent enough (the best they could do without making it seem ridiculous, I suppose).

- The final battle with Doomsday is cool, and pretty well done. They even corrected one of Man of Steel's more glaring flaws by accounting for civilian, collateral, damage, and moving the fight out of the city's populated areas. They also set it at night, so the effects are less obvious.​

Cons

- The dream sequences. Ugh. They're hokey, add very little, and tack an extra thirty minutes on to the film's running time. All I can figure is that they're meant to set something up in a sequel (given the appearance of a 'time traveler' in the final one).

- Lex Luthor. His plan ultimately turns out to be interesting, but I really didn't like Jessie Eisenberg's performance nevertheless.

Put bluntly, Loki, he is not. He comes off as being an annoying little twerp more than anything else. They should have stuck with Kevin Spacey. Lol

- Some of Batman's more heavily choreographed fight scenes really stretched suspension of disbelief (see 'annoying Snyderisms' above). Why is Batman able to skitter along ceilings like freaking Spiderman? Is it one of his "wonderful toys?" Establish it then. For that matter, it looks like a lot of the goons he fights deliberately hesitate before pulling the trigger for no reason other than plot convenience. This whole aspect of the film could have been handled better.

- Lois Lane still feels like a bit of a "third wheel." There are also waaaay too many convenient plot elements revolving around her.

How does she always know precisely where Superman is? How does he always know precisely where she is? That could have probably used an establishing scene of some sort (no, Africa really wasn't good enough).

- Some of the lines meant to feel "deep" and "thought provoking" fall short of the intended mark.

- The ending third of the film feels a bit rushed in comparison to what came before.

- I think introducing Doomsday and Darkseid this early in the game is a bit pre-mature.​

....

In any eventuality, it's leaps and bounds better than any of the "Fantastic 4" movies, or cinematic train wrecks like "Daredevil," and the "Amazing Spiderman 2." I'm okay with that.

Overall: 6.8 out of 10

A 6.8???!!!! Wow! I wasn't expecting you to give it such a good rating. It looks so stupid in the trailers.

Eh. I dunno. Maybe I'm being too charitable.[emoji38]

Somewhere between 6 and 7 (probably around 6.5) seems reasonable to me though. The film is definitely flawed and clunky, but it has some really good elements too.

The good outweighs the bad, IMO.

 

[Sgt_Gath]

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

The critics seem to be destroying this movie! I am wary of critics, because I have seen times were they destroyed a movie that I enjoyed - Funny People comes to mind.

However for the most part when all the critics are against something the movie is mediocre at best.

The critics seem to not like this movie. For a movie that was so expensive it was reported that it needs to crack a billion worldwide to make a profit, thinks aren't looking good.

While I loved Man of Steel, it seems very few other people liked it.

2 stinkers in a row and a foresure to under-perform suicide squad DCEU isn't off to a great start.

I just got back from seeing it.

My opinion? It was "okay" with some "eh" features here and there.

I don't think it was as good as the first Avengers film, or Deadpool, but it's hardly the "disaster" people are making it out to be either. It just has some pacing issues, takes itself a tad too seriously, suffers from a few mildly annoying "Snyderisms," and has some clunky plot elements. It more than redeems itself by the end, however.


Pros

- Cavil is fine as Superman, as usual.

- Affleck as Batman (or - rather - Bruce Wayne) is actually one of the highlights of the film. He has a certain weary, low-key, cynical and unhappy intensity about him which serves the character well.

He's a bit more kill-happy (or, at the very least, more blasé with regard to the consequences of extreme violence) than usually depicted, and some people have been complaining that he seems to come off as being a "psychotic thug" as such. To that, I say - where the former is concerned - it's a little jarring at first, but you ultimately get over it, and - to the later - yea, that's kind of the whole point. He's Batman, he's supposed to have "issues," and that is clearly what Affleck was going for in his performance.

Hell! They even bring up Bruce Wane's (so far ignored in cinema) promiscuity... Albeit in a subtle way. He casually mentions at least one tryst, and more than once, we see an anonymous, faceless, and basically irrelevant female body sharing his bed in the morning scenes. The implication being that these women ultimately mean as little to the film as they do to Bruce himself. It's clever, and I appreciate that; basically James Bond without the romanticization of such behavior that usually entails.

It's also interesting to note that this version of Bruce's parents (played, amusingly enough, by Maggie and Negan from 'The Walking Dead') are actually shot because they try to fight back. I wonder what we're meant to take from that.

- Wonder Woman was pretty good, I thought. Her "formal" introduction was actually one of the best scenes in the movie.

First off, Gal Gadot is freaking gorgeous (just throwing that out there lol).

Secondly, she fit the right balance with regard to personality and performance. She didn't come off as being "over the top"/"in your face" in her abilities, or overly butch. She was simply serious, and competent, while remaining distinctly feminine. They left it at - as "matter of factly" as they could - which worked surprisingly well. Her abilities, when she finally appeared in costume, didn't strain suspension of disbelief at all for that reason (IMO, anyway).

- The actual fight between Batman and Superman is decent enough (the best they could do without making it seem ridiculous, I suppose).

- The final battle with Doomsday is cool, and pretty well done. They even corrected one of Man of Steel's more glaring flaws by accounting for civilian, collateral, damage, and moving the fight out of the city's populated areas. They also set it at night, so the effects are less obvious.​

Cons

- The dream sequences. Ugh. They're hokey, add very little, and tack an extra thirty minutes on to the film's running time. All I can figure is that they're meant to set something up in a sequel (given the appearance of a 'time traveler' in the final one).

- Lex Luthor. His plan ultimately turns out to be interesting, but I really didn't like Jessie Eisenberg's performance nevertheless.

Put bluntly, Loki, he is not. He comes off as being an annoying little twerp more than anything else. They should have stuck with Kevin Spacey. Lol

- Some of Batman's more heavily choreographed fight scenes really stretched suspension of disbelief (see 'annoying Snyderisms' above). Why is Batman able to skitter along ceilings like freaking Spiderman? Is it one of his "wonderful toys?" Establish it then. For that matter, it looks like a lot of the goons he fights deliberately hesitate before pulling the trigger for no reason other than plot convenience. This whole aspect of the film could have been handled better.

- Lois Lane still feels like a bit of a "third wheel." There are also waaaay too many convenient plot elements revolving around her.

How does she always know precisely where Superman is? How does he always know precisely where she is? That could have probably used an establishing scene of some sort (no, Africa really wasn't good enough).

- Some of the lines meant to feel "deep" and "thought provoking" fall short of the intended mark.

- The ending third of the film feels a bit rushed in comparison to what came before.

- I think introducing Doomsday and Darkseid this early in the game is a bit pre-mature.​

....

In any eventuality, it's leaps and bounds better than any of the "Fantastic 4" movies, or cinematic train wrecks like "Daredevil," and the "Amazing Spiderman 2." I'm okay with that.

Overall: 6.8 out of 10

Which one was the "bad guy?" Superman or Batman? You weren't very clear on that. And also, why are they fighting with each other?

Neither, actually. Lex Luthor is the bad guy, and he basically manipulates them into fighting one another.

By the end, they team up to defeat him.

 

[2aguy]

Showing the parent's,fighting back and getting killed is lefty beliefs about crime and violence.......you see it here on u.s.message......the lefties here think of you fight back you get killed and that there is no reason a criminal will just murder you during a robbery unless you, the victim, make him do it.

 

[sealybobo]

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

The critics seem to be destroying this movie! I am wary of critics, because I have seen times were they destroyed a movie that I enjoyed - Funny People comes to mind.

However for the most part when all the critics are against something the movie is mediocre at best.

The critics seem to not like this movie. For a movie that was so expensive it was reported that it needs to crack a billion worldwide to make a profit, thinks aren't looking good.

While I loved Man of Steel, it seems very few other people liked it.

2 stinkers in a row and a foresure to under-perform suicide squad DCEU isn't off to a great start.

I heard bad story and too long but that won't stop me from watching it when it comes out on DVD.

I love superhero movies and I haven't loved a Superman since Superman 2 with Christopher Reeves.

The other day I watched an old Superman where Alan on 3 1/2 men was lex's nephew and how he fooled the guards and sprung lex from jail was so bad.

 

[ChrisL]

I liked the first Spiderman and I liked the first Ironman. Gosh, there have been so many Batman movies, I don't which ones I liked, but I did like the Dark Knight. That was good. I'm not much of a "super hero" or a comic book person, so it really has to be good for me to watch it.

 

[ChrisL]

Showing the parent's,fighting back and getting killed is lefty beliefs about crime and violence.......you see it here on u.s.message......the lefties here think of you fight back you get killed and that there is no reason a criminal will just murder you during a robbery unless you, the victim, make him do it.

Oh, come on! Aren't there enough political threads here for you to talk about this stuff on? This is supposed to be fun and lighthearted.

 

[2aguy]

Showing the parent's,fighting back and getting killed is lefty beliefs about crime and violence.......you see it here on u.s.message......the lefties here think of you fight back you get killed and that there is no reason a criminal will just murder you during a robbery unless you, the victim, make him do it.

Oh, come on! Aren't there enough political threads here for you to talk about this stuff on? This is supposed to be fun and lighthearted.

I know....I try to keep it separate but he asked the question about the parents fighting back vs. all the other times the story was told....and the actual event from the origin of batman........

 

[ChrisL]

Showing the parent's,fighting back and getting killed is lefty beliefs about crime and violence.......you see it here on u.s.message......the lefties here think of you fight back you get killed and that there is no reason a criminal will just murder you during a robbery unless you, the victim, make him do it.

Oh, come on! Aren't there enough political threads here for you to talk about this stuff on? This is supposed to be fun and lighthearted.

I know....I try to keep it separate but he asked the question about the parents fighting back vs. all the other times the story was told....and the actual event from the origin of batman........

Still . . . they are characters and not real people. I don't remember them ever being assigned a "political" affiliation. And if that is how some people feel, that is fine. They just cannot force others to share their belief systems. So no big deal.